Lynn Erickson

gel coat is heaver. it weighs more then paint. gel coat is resin with pigment in it. when applied all the weight of the resin and pigment are there on the part that it coated. paint contains solvents that evaporate when it dries, there for you can not compare the weight of it in the can as a liquid. Gel coat will never give you as good looking a finish as paint.

that is what we are trying to do, keep you from learning the hard way. there are many types of mold release agents and cleaners used in making molded parts. they are used to release a part from the mold. first off we are not using molds, hence the name Mold-less composite construction. putting on a release agent that has the potential to be left behind on the surface that can result in a delam at a latter date is just not smart. why do this when it is not needed in the first place. there are thousands of these aircraft that where built and they did not need to use it to complete their projects. lets see if I have this right , if we buy a product and put it on the surface to solve a problem that is not a problem in the first place, then do we need to buy the product that is used to remove the product that we did not need in the first place to solve the problem that did not exist? sounds like a government project, take the time to spend the money on something that they never needed in the first place.

I agree with Mark. what happen to the good old method of put on glass and resin and squeege it out the excess resin and you are done. peel ply is a good thing if you want to hold down the edge or if the surface is to be filled or another layer is to be applied. the plastic or mylar thing is not always a good thing, it does allow the excess resin to be move around under the plastic but the excess resin still needs to be removed from the top of the layup or it does no good to use the plastic. it does leave a smooth shinny surface but that is not what you want. it may look good to the novice builder but not someone who knows good glassing techniques. the surface should be rough as in sanding or peeled plied surface so filler or paint will stick. Some of the new glassing techniques I see used may be "very not recommended" techniques and may cause a dangerous layup. at best they all are adding another experiment into your experimental project. so next time you are at 15,000 feet in you project give some thought to the way you modified the plans glassing technique.as for Wax or silicone , don't do it. don't get it anywhere near the plane until its the paint job that you are using it on. when I do a pre buy inspection for someone I ask the question of type of techniques used. and if wax or silicone is in the answer the inspection is done.

If I was doing a Vari I would go O-320. there are no subs for Cubic inches. it makes a great speed machine and will still cruse at 170 kts buring 5.5 Gal. per hour. the smaller engine are good engines but nothing like a good real aircraft engine. the 0-320 will cost less, last longer and get the same fuel burn in cruse but if you want to go fast you can. the other engines will be working there A----s off and will never get anywhere near the speed and will burn a lot more fuel trying. fire wall back on those engines will set you back 20 G's + and a overhauled O-320 can be had for 16. the plane will have a much better resale with an O-320. A good vari with a O-320 will go in the high 50s. the weight thing is not a problem, it has been done and it works out great. you are adding 10% more weight and getting 50% more HP. ask any vari driver what engine they would like to have if they did it again and most will say the 320.

there is no need to remove the wingcuffs they do exactly the same thing as the vortilons. the ones that changed to vortilons said there is no difference in handling or speed. Some said the cuffs worked better then the vortilons on the higher swept wing of the vari. The vortilon was designed for the long eze and some were installed on later vari ezs because they did not require re-finishing and painting . the trailing edge fences work well on the vari ez to reduce dutch roll at landing speeds allowing a lower landing speed. every vari we have put them on loves them. and yes they do need to be that big to work.

Congrats, that is a big milestoneThe Lycoming oil pressure is 60 to 90 psi during normal operating temps. normally it is adjusted to 65 to 70 psi. keeping it on the lower side helps by having a lower pressure on the crank seal. adjusted to a lower pressure the valve can open faster during cold starts which can cause a spike pressure of over 300 psi which can damage the oil cooler and crank seal. after engine start adjust the RPM to keep the pressure under 90 psi until the engine warms up. the pressure is adjusted by a threaded adjustment screw on some models and by adding or subtracting washers between the spring and spring cover on other models. the washers are standard AN - 4 washers. Lycoming does have 4 different springs available and the adjustment can be made by changing springs but they are not cheep so most use the washers.

These are homebuilts and no two are alike as far as options go, and there are not that many O-320 that were built as O 320's, most were converted from O-235 powered flying aircraft. finding one with all the option you would like could be like finding a needle in a haystack. many people think you can go out and buy and fly as you would a certified aircraft. there may be the rare exception out there but most of them are an on going experimental project that is never finished. they require constant maintenance for which there is no standard manual, no standard spec used to determine the original condition , and no guaranty that it was built to an acceptable condition in the first place. Most of the buyer / flyers that I know bought an aircraft that was close to what they wanted and had a qualified person do the modifications that they required. some have bought aricraft with the intent to do many mods but after they had flown the aircraft found that the mods they originally had in mind were not really a good idea after all. Good luck in your search.

I am sure you meant that you could 5 minute epoxy the canard to the table as you know bondo will dissolve the blue foam used for the canard

Try David Orr at canardfinder@att.net He has helped many find the right plane.

Are Norfsworgle rudder pedals on the Cozy Grrrils parts lists, if not they should be.

This would be a good place to use peel ply both on the micro and on the stepped back plys. nicer finish and less sanding

This may be OK for the fuselage but not for the wings. on the wing the uni fibers are aligned from corner to corner. this is a lot steeper span wise angle then 45 degrees.

have never seen this happen but I have seen the rear part of the NG 30 broken loose and up against the canard from a hard drop in landing.

Do you mean the nose wheel box? That should be available from Featherlite or Areocanard.

Maybe we can still save you. if you are reading on this forum there still maybe hope. Why a quickie? why not a real Rutan canard? a real airplane. the Q does not make any since. they take just as long to build as an eze. they are way to small to be comfortable. there are not any good reliable engines for them. the resale value sucks. and they are very difficult to fly. and have the highest percentage of owners that have wrecked or scared them selves so bad they wont fly it again and sold it cheap.

The linear actuator I use is 110 lbs. 4" stroke 12 volt motor

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/03/03/germany.plane/index.html#cnnSTCVi http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/03/03/germany.plane/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

Lawyers and liability. and they would be required to supply parts, which are another liability.

what do you mean ? there is still a Starship flying, comes into Chino all the time. saw it take off last week. see linkwww.bobscherer.com/Pages/Starship.htm

I sadly report a Velocity crashed into RV 8. the videos and pics on the links. http://www.local6.com http://www.wftv.com very said.

It is POM or Polyoxymethylene or commonly known as acetal resin or Delrin the Dupont trade name. is is very easy to machine and very stable. it machines very precision and is a good bearing for low speeds. Delrin is much harder and stronger then UHMW. UHMW is a slicker bearing material but is a much softer material. either one will work for our purpose. as does the plans phenolic. the phenolic can be bonded with epoxy resin but the delrin and UHMW can not.

check on Ebay they come up all the time but expect to pay about $80 to $100 , salvage yard will get about $ 150 to $ 200 or you can get one from Lycoming for $ 489

Now thats different. if you say you want to have fun while flying thats really going to cost you a lot more. just kidding. if you are to use lets say two - 100 HP engines on a for place twin aircraft and one goes out the 100 HP engine is not going to be enough to maintain safe flight. if you use 2- 150 HP engines you may have a safe plane on one engine but now you are fly a 300HP machine and you are not going to go 1000 nm on 60 gallons of av gas. Ivo will not sell you a prop if they know it is going on a 4 cyl. engine. they have had hub and blade failures do to the high power pulses and vibration of 4 cyl. engines

if your mission is far fast and cheep I would say take a commercial airline. if on a 1000 mile mission your design turns out to be more efficient then the airlines it would be a first. far and cheep can be done with many designs but it is the fast part that will cost you dollars in fuel and HP. then add the twin engine to the mix and the efficiency goes down even more. a twin with engines to small to keep the aircraft in the air on only one engine is not really a true twin and not any safer then a single.As for the VW well they were good to get people to the market or a Stones concert. the Ivo prop has been a good prop on many aircraft. they are not recommended for 4 cylinder engines. they have a limited amount of pitch change. In My opinion not worth the small performance gain. I have not flown behind one but have flown along side one. and did not see the gain both aircraft got off in less the 2000 ft. top end is good but not as good as a fixed pitch

I am not saying to stop on the contrary it is a lot of fun to try and figure out these problems. but i have been there and have built full size mock ups to figure out this problem and and it is hard to make it all work unless the size of things is designed around a full size person. this makes the design about 1.5 times the size of a cozy. the long eze canopy is almost vertical where it contacts the top of the fuselage and curves back to the top of the canopy. if you project a line from the top of the canopy to the nose as in the Piaggio the canopy will be the length of the fuselage. if you don't go all the way to the nose with the canopy you will loose forward visibility. It will look like a sailplane canopy. and forward visibilty in sailplanes are not that good but they spend most of the time looking out the side in a bank anyway.